TL;DR Mandatory voting would create a fairer society

It is a privilege to be able to vote. It is a right that people have fought and died for. The very premise of democracy is that all sections of society are represented at a governing level. A lack of participation in the electoral systems will lead to the formation of governments that represent the ideals and principles of only those that are politically active. If everyone is made to vote then policymaking at the very highest level will have a better chance of benefitting wider society instead of those who choose to vote.

TL;DR: Mandatory voting can reduce voter suppression and incentivize voter participation.

Mandatory voting has been proven to stimulate democratic participation and, as a result, the strength of democracy. The idea will likely become more crucial after the 2020 U.S. general election. The perpetuation of the “election fraud” lie by Donald Trump and his GOP Party has incentivized various states to pass voter suppression laws. Since many politicians have tried to copy Trump’s playbook over the past, it seems likely some will try to spread the same lie for political gains. Mandatory voting can make it significantly more difficult for politicians to take away people’s voting rights or suppress the participation of specific voters. Hence, the issue of voting has taken on a particular significance at this time.

Beyond the need of the moment, mandatory voting has produced some impressive benefits to democracies. Not only does the policy increase voter participation across the board, it significantly reduces the class or racial gaps in voting. Hence, the overall electorate becomes closer to the general population due to mandatory voting. However, the benefit of the policy does not stop at participation. It often has ripple effects through entire democratic systems. While many have objected to the policy in fear of “ignorant voters,” evidence has shown that mandatory voting increases people’s interest in and knowledge of politics. Political parties become much more focused on substantial policy positions and ideologies rather than clientele machine politics.

Mandatory voting represents a stimulus to democracy. Its importance has only increased during our time. For these reasons, voting should be mandatory.

With a mere 59.4% turnout, the 2001 general election was tainted by voter apathy. This a major democratic problem that needs addressing.

Since 1924, Australia has had compulsory voting in place and people who violate this have to pay a fine. Consequently, the 2019 Australian federal election received a turnout of 92%. By tackling this turnout issue, mandatory voting can improve voter participation and therefore encourage public engagement in politics. By creating an increasingly politicized public, mandatory voting can allow candidates to focus more on policy rather than spending time trying to get voters to the polls. Moreover, on a more moral level, people died to give us the privilege to vote - therefore, voting is not just a right, but a responsibility.

However, mandatory voting is far from a simple answer. It has many cons and while solves the problem on the surface, participation enforcement can’t tackle the roots of this democratic crisis. Specifically, mandatory voting opens the door to uninformed voters. It is a common trend for disillusioned voters to spoil their ballot paper, creating wasted votes. Arguably this is more undemocratic than voters choosing not to vote. Another consequence that can arise from uninformed voters is ‘donkey voting’. This is when a voter ticks the first candidate on their ballot paper or records his vote by numbering the candidates from top to bottom.

Perhaps the issue isn’t whether people are voting or not, but it's why people are choosing not to vote. In this sense, mandatory voting won’t solve this deep-rooted issue and instead, we should be looking to ways of politicizing the public so people are more interested in voting on their own behalf. For example, the 2016 EU Referendum received a turnout of 72.2%, implying that a heightened public debate enthused the public and caused more people to want to vote. However, mandatory voting could help to engage and encourage the public, thus providing a long-term and exponential solution to political disillusionment.

Yes voting should be mandatory, but only because suffrage should not be universal. Universal suffrage is an absurdist policy that cannot be realized even when implemented. Only about 30% of any given population votes: these are the most communally minded and dedicated people, everyone else can't be bothered. It also leaves a door wide open to subversives, foreign interests, and fraud. Thus, suffrage should be limited to those who can prove their dedication to public service, and have a stake in the community. A term of public service, either military or civilian, and land ownership are two easy ones although there are others. However, with limited suffrage voting is simply an extention of voluntarily assumed
d duty to the state, and duty is mandatory

Make it mandatory and the people who object will vote for the worst candidate possible and the people who don't vote because they don't understand politics will skew the vote.

TL;DR: It should not be necessary to coerce people into voting

A functioning democracy needs the active and willing participation of all (or at least the vast majority of) citizens. We should build societies where people care about politics and want to vote. And if we have got to the point where participation is so low that we are considering mandatory voting, we should first consider what has gone wrong to get us here and fix that first.

Mandatory voting is a contentious issue with strong arguments on both sides.

For:

Increased Participation: Mandatory voting ensures higher voter turnout, leading to a more representative and legitimate government. Higher participation rates can result in more equitable policies that reflect the will of the entire population, not just a motivated subset.

Civic Duty: Voting is a civic duty akin to jury service or paying taxes. Mandatory voting reinforces the idea that participating in the democratic process is a fundamental responsibility of citizenship.

Reduced Influence of Extremists: With more people voting, the influence of extreme or fringe groups can be diluted. A higher turnout can lead to more moderate and centrist policies that reflect the broader public opinion.

Against:

Freedom of Choice: Compulsory voting can be seen as an infringement on individual freedom. People should have the right to abstain from voting if they are uninterested or uninformed about the candidates and issues.

Informed Voting: Forcing uninterested or uninformed citizens to vote could lead to arbitrary or uninformed choices, potentially skewing election results and undermining the quality of democratic decision-making.

Practical Challenges: Implementing mandatory voting can pose logistical challenges and require enforcement mechanisms that could be costly and difficult to administer. It may also necessitate penalties for non-compliance, which could disproportionately affect disadvantaged groups.

TL;DR if you vote, you cannot complain. you wanted a master and you got one (George Carlin)

Karl Popper elaborated that the key benefit of democracy (voting) is the ability to get rid of a government without bloodshed.
There I’d agree. But I don’t feel anybody of the usual candidates is suitable to represent me in a government and I certainly have no intention to speak for others (i.e. run for office). So I abstain from voting and I make it clear that no government can claim to act in my name or on my behalf.
I do not endorse nor legitimize government action.
It needs to be stated clearly: “mandatory”, if it is to mean anything, means coerced. It means that if I prefer not to vote, you (or your agents) would need to put a gun to my head and make me vote.